What do you think?
Rate this book
Race, Intelligence and Bias in Academe
Race, Intelligence and Bias in Roger Race, Intelligence and Bias in Scott Townsend FIRST First Edition, First Printing. Published by Scott-Townsend Publishers, 1991. Octavo. Paperback. Book is very good with shelf wear and stamps om half title page and title page and presentation bookplate on page opposite Preface. An excellent copy of this prolific collection of essays from Pearson. 100% positive feedback. 30 day money back guarantee. NEXT DAY SHIPPING! Excellent customer service. Please email with any questions. All books packed carefully and ship with free delivery confirmation/tracking. All books come with free bookmarks. Ships from Sag Harbor, New York.Seller 346812 Essays We Buy Books! Collections - Libraries - Estates - Individual Titles. Message us if you have books to sell!
- GenresRacePsychology
304 pages, Paperback
First published June 1, 1991
53 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews
July 31, 2021
9.5/10.
The essential problem for anyone looking into the history of a movement labeled to be on the Right-wing of the political spectrum is that most, if not all accounts of the movements published since the 60s mix 25% history with 75% commentary. These pieces become simple editorials for the Left to shriek, slander, and compare every person on the Right with the Worst of Them All. This is the case with most histories of intelligence research and eugenics, even though people from many races and different political beliefs research these questions (Michael Levin, Herrnstein, and Eysenck are Jewish; intelligence researchers range from moderately liberal to libertarian to racial nationalists).
Well, anyways, Roger Pearson has allowed interested readers to go around the above difficulty. His book is a history of the modern heresy of pronouncing group and class differences in IQ. But before that, he traces the history of the eugenics movement from its most eminent supporters (Galton and Karl Pearson [related to our author?]) to all of its former organizations taking the word "eugenics" out of their name. Then Pearson shows how our society is not free, because a free society is only free if voices are allowed to talk about the fringes of acceptable discourse. Arthur Jensen, JP Rushton, and William Shockley get the most extended treatment; I compare them to my most revered philosopher, Socrates: standing up for truth despite the social and political environment. Hans Eysenck writes a great memoir of his experiences at the beginning of the book, and the experiences of scholars who have been attacked (up to April 1991) are also given.
A major benefit you will gain from reading this work is to see how the far Left and the media assaults empirical data on intelligence and group differences. In short: they do not assault the data! They never even mention the data. They resort to tactics like: (a) saying the "scholarly consensus" totally denies such findings, and defines the scholarly consensus as rabid activists who work furiously to get their voices everywhere (Gould, Lewontin, etc.); (b) compare the scholar's findings to Hitler, or Gobineau, and say "all such myths have been refuted", in reference to the 'scholars' above; (c) appeal to the consequences of such research, saying that they, e.g., "undermine the quest for racial equality" (never undermines empirical findings); (d) slander scholars' research by distorting their viewpoint with deliberate exaggerations like "genetic determinism" or by saying that eugenics supporters want to strip all freedoms away from everyone; (e) make all the above lies and hysterical bouts so frequent and so dangerous that nearly all upcoming scholars are directed away from heterodox research, thereby attempting to destroy it all together through intimidation and plain ignorance.
Another thing you will learn from this book is that the more things change, the more they stay the same. Research into eugenics has been condemned by the press for at least 100 years, if not from its very beginning. Even Galton himself spent much time refuting press accounts of what he had to say. Furthermore, research into group differences in IQ and achievement has been viciously attacked (its scholars too!) for 50 years. Arthur Jensen was attacked so much that: (a) all his phone calls and mail had to go through his local police department; (b) he had to be taken in a getaway car to escape from far Left stormings of his speeches at least 3 times; and (c) the police would not allow his 11 year old daughter to walk 2 blocks to the bus for a whole year because of fears for her safety. One time the police drove Arthur Jensen and 15 psychology professors to a house after a Leftist stormed Jensen's planned conference. The Leftists found out about Jensen's new location and proceeded to storm that building, with the psychology faculty having to defend the house against the incoming horde until the police came.
JP Rushton was assaulted by a protestor and rushed to the local hospital. He was also nearly put in prison for 2 years in Canada for breaking thought crime laws, but he got away. Hans Eysenck and co. were spat upon by Marxist-Leninists. William Shockley, after facing tens to hundreds of press slanders, finally sued one newspaper for $1.5 million for labelled him a 'Fascist', among other completely false remarks. The mixed race jury found the newspaper guilty, and gave Shockley . . . $1. Yes, one dollar!
Pearson did not know if things would change in the future, but he had a portentous feeling that things would get worse. He saw that the newfound prominence and continued rise of minorities and government bureaucrats whose jobs rely on various affirmative action systems meant that ideology may be entrenched ever more and scholars increasingly persecuted if they attempt to bring their data to the public. For scholars have found some data which may be upsetting to those people, and which undermines most programs designed to eliminate different group outcomes in education and income. But, no matters how many deny the data, it continues to have an impact on reality. And the folly of ignoring it can be seen today. The biggest problems of the West have a lot to do with declining intelligence, rising deleterious mutations, and highly heritable traits like IQ and personality — but our policy makers continue to not even look at the data. If the ignorance continues, then perhaps the best we can hope for is a revival of civilization based on empirical fact after the inevitable collapse due to collective blindness.
The essential problem for anyone looking into the history of a movement labeled to be on the Right-wing of the political spectrum is that most, if not all accounts of the movements published since the 60s mix 25% history with 75% commentary. These pieces become simple editorials for the Left to shriek, slander, and compare every person on the Right with the Worst of Them All. This is the case with most histories of intelligence research and eugenics, even though people from many races and different political beliefs research these questions (Michael Levin, Herrnstein, and Eysenck are Jewish; intelligence researchers range from moderately liberal to libertarian to racial nationalists).
Well, anyways, Roger Pearson has allowed interested readers to go around the above difficulty. His book is a history of the modern heresy of pronouncing group and class differences in IQ. But before that, he traces the history of the eugenics movement from its most eminent supporters (Galton and Karl Pearson [related to our author?]) to all of its former organizations taking the word "eugenics" out of their name. Then Pearson shows how our society is not free, because a free society is only free if voices are allowed to talk about the fringes of acceptable discourse. Arthur Jensen, JP Rushton, and William Shockley get the most extended treatment; I compare them to my most revered philosopher, Socrates: standing up for truth despite the social and political environment. Hans Eysenck writes a great memoir of his experiences at the beginning of the book, and the experiences of scholars who have been attacked (up to April 1991) are also given.
A major benefit you will gain from reading this work is to see how the far Left and the media assaults empirical data on intelligence and group differences. In short: they do not assault the data! They never even mention the data. They resort to tactics like: (a) saying the "scholarly consensus" totally denies such findings, and defines the scholarly consensus as rabid activists who work furiously to get their voices everywhere (Gould, Lewontin, etc.); (b) compare the scholar's findings to Hitler, or Gobineau, and say "all such myths have been refuted", in reference to the 'scholars' above; (c) appeal to the consequences of such research, saying that they, e.g., "undermine the quest for racial equality" (never undermines empirical findings); (d) slander scholars' research by distorting their viewpoint with deliberate exaggerations like "genetic determinism" or by saying that eugenics supporters want to strip all freedoms away from everyone; (e) make all the above lies and hysterical bouts so frequent and so dangerous that nearly all upcoming scholars are directed away from heterodox research, thereby attempting to destroy it all together through intimidation and plain ignorance.
Another thing you will learn from this book is that the more things change, the more they stay the same. Research into eugenics has been condemned by the press for at least 100 years, if not from its very beginning. Even Galton himself spent much time refuting press accounts of what he had to say. Furthermore, research into group differences in IQ and achievement has been viciously attacked (its scholars too!) for 50 years. Arthur Jensen was attacked so much that: (a) all his phone calls and mail had to go through his local police department; (b) he had to be taken in a getaway car to escape from far Left stormings of his speeches at least 3 times; and (c) the police would not allow his 11 year old daughter to walk 2 blocks to the bus for a whole year because of fears for her safety. One time the police drove Arthur Jensen and 15 psychology professors to a house after a Leftist stormed Jensen's planned conference. The Leftists found out about Jensen's new location and proceeded to storm that building, with the psychology faculty having to defend the house against the incoming horde until the police came.
JP Rushton was assaulted by a protestor and rushed to the local hospital. He was also nearly put in prison for 2 years in Canada for breaking thought crime laws, but he got away. Hans Eysenck and co. were spat upon by Marxist-Leninists. William Shockley, after facing tens to hundreds of press slanders, finally sued one newspaper for $1.5 million for labelled him a 'Fascist', among other completely false remarks. The mixed race jury found the newspaper guilty, and gave Shockley . . . $1. Yes, one dollar!
Pearson did not know if things would change in the future, but he had a portentous feeling that things would get worse. He saw that the newfound prominence and continued rise of minorities and government bureaucrats whose jobs rely on various affirmative action systems meant that ideology may be entrenched ever more and scholars increasingly persecuted if they attempt to bring their data to the public. For scholars have found some data which may be upsetting to those people, and which undermines most programs designed to eliminate different group outcomes in education and income. But, no matters how many deny the data, it continues to have an impact on reality. And the folly of ignoring it can be seen today. The biggest problems of the West have a lot to do with declining intelligence, rising deleterious mutations, and highly heritable traits like IQ and personality — but our policy makers continue to not even look at the data. If the ignorance continues, then perhaps the best we can hope for is a revival of civilization based on empirical fact after the inevitable collapse due to collective blindness.
August 12, 2019
Definitely worth reading for people interested in the history of IQ and behavioral genetics.
December 18, 2009
Excellent book. The anecdotes of the absurdity of how leftists foolishly objected to research on the interplay of intelligence and race. The story of the math undergrad objecting to IQ on the basis of what the IQ of an infinitely wise and old deity is classic.
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews